64 ms·

The war against today's dangerously dull playgrounds

247 points by bo0tzz 7y ago

OrderlyTiamat 7y ago
I am surprised not to see jonathan haidt mentioned- his views on this subject align with the authors, and he brings an interesting perspective to the table.
jammygit 7y ago
I’ve seen some pretty cool playgrounds in the last year where I live, personally
noneeeed 7y ago
One of the unexpectedly adventurous organisations when it comes to playgrounds in the uk is the National Trust. When I was a kid, a visit to an NT property was being dragged around some posh house where you couldn't touch anything. Somewhere around 15-20 years ago I think they realised their clientele was getting older and older and ever since they've been on a bit of a mission to make more of their properties kid/family friendly. They now have some of the best play areas we know of, most of them in woodland, with the equipment etc made of wood, often taken from the woodland, or built into the landscape. We took a small group to one today, and they would have spent hours playing there if we'd had the time, much longer than they will play at some of the more structured "modern" play areas near here.
- ascorbic 7y ago
  Do you have suggestions of any particularly good ones?
  - noneeeed 7y ago
    Near us, Tyntesfield is great. There is an obstacle course type one down by one of the cafes, then there are three on a trail up in the woods. Some are more structured than others. We've taken to using NT sites as breaks on long journeys. At a minimum they will have a cafe, and most will have something to give us and the kids a nice break from the car. Its definitely a nicer way to stretch your legs than a motorway sercvice station. The app is pretty useful for this. They can be pricey as individual visits, but if you go to more than a couple a year, a family membership pays for self pretty quickly.
fredley 7y ago
No mention of the Harbourfront Adventure Playground in Toronto, in the 70's and 80's, a very famous example of an unsafe play environment: https://www.blogto.com/city/2017/09/adventure-playground-toronto-history/ https://www.blogto.com/city/2017/09/adventure-playground-tor...
- kingbirdy 7y ago
  I would've loved to have a place like that as a kid
- ninth_ant 7y ago
  There is an adventure playground in Berkeley that my kids adored when I used to live in a nearby city. I’m not sure how it’s avoided a similar fate to the Toronto example you refer to, but it’s a wonderful place. Terrifying to watch as a parent no doubt, but empowering for the kids.
darth_skywalker 7y ago
Sure, some playgrounds may be mind-numbingly dull, but those are a well-intentioned response to older playgrounds that posed serious physical dangers. You can argue that getting a little bit scraped up once in a while isn't bad for children; it may teach them lessons about how to avoid such future mistakes - but plenty of children have sustained more serious injuries on playgrounds that allowed them to climb much higher than they could on, say, a tree in nature (speaking from my life experience). I think the article conflates the issue of modern over parenting with safer playground design - which if done right, can only be a good thing.
- hashkb 7y ago
  I've fallen from trees higher than any playground. Only serious injury I ever had was on (and because of) AstroTurf.
  - catalogia 7y ago
    Ditto, I grew up in the woods so climbing on trees was an everyday activity for me, more frequent than playing on playgrounds. I used to climb trees as far as the tree would support, then climb it further until it collapsed. I fell out of more trees doing that than I can count. Thankfully, helicopter parents cannot hope to regulate trees.
  - watwut 7y ago
    Ok and I know ine guy (kid) who spent weeks in hospital due to fall from tree and two other people who broke limb (adults). That is on top of head incidents close to me. I don't prevent my kids to climb trees, but accidents do happen.
- ip26 7y ago
  A big part of the complaint is that injury rates & severity has stayed about the same. It seems the safer we make the playground, the more risks the kids take. It's called risk compensation.
  - lazyasciiart 7y ago
diego 7y ago
Calling this a war is the reason the saying "pick your battles" exists. Anyone who is a parent knows that kids always find ways to hurt themselves, there is no shortage of opportunities. Might as well make playgrounds safe, kids don't care as long as they have fun.
Iv 7y ago
All these old pictures showing kids having fun in environments we consider harmful, always depict kids older than those we typically let play in playgrounds. From the age of ~3 kids start to learn their motor skills to climb, grab, jump, do all sort of stuff. Kids of the age of these pictures, you let them play wherever that's not a death trap, they'll basically be fine.
- jessaustin 7y ago
  Stay out of the abandoned mineshaft, kids!
imgabe 7y ago
They do have softer ground and rounder corners but the playgrounds today are way cooler than I was a kid. The one near me has climbing walls and a zip line. It's crazy.
CapitalistCartr 7y ago
I find the playgrounds in my city (Tampa, FL) to be excellent. This article is completely wrong about the parks here. I have 5 young grandchildren and a 20 month old son, so lots of observation time. The grounds are wildly loved by the kids there. They have rubber surfaces that dramatically reduce broken bones, but do not prevent pain. I love that they still get scrapes, bruises. The sets are large, complex, and fun. My kids will spend as many hours as we let them.
- jacobolus 7y ago
  How old are the kids you are talking about? 20-month-olds are happy with literally any playground, especially if there are a few other kids. They are still learning the very basics of climbing, running, sliding, swinging, ... Most playgrounds are okay for 0–8 year-olds. It’s older kids, especially teenagers, who get most bored on de-risked modern playgrounds, and either give up on them or start looking around for (often quite stupid) ways to make them riskier, e.g. a group of 6 kids climbing onto a swing intended for 1 kid (thereby breaking it), riding their skateboards down the slide (and almost running over the toddlers at the bottom), climbing up onto the roofs of buildings that weren’t intended for climbing, throwing rocks at each-other, ... The playground near my house was re-done a few years ago, and the number of kids older than 10 has dropped dramatically. All of the toddlers are plenty happy with the new one, but it’s a net loss for the city because there are many good playgrounds for kids under 8, and very few for older kids. Aside: those rubber surfaces are very uncomfortable on bare feet any time the temperature is above 80°F. And often playground wood chips are full of extremely sharp corners (My adult friend stepped on a wood chip which punctured both his shoe and his foot). Sand, dirt, grass, and even concrete are all much more pleasant.
  - learc83 7y ago
    I was a kid when we still had dangerous steel playgrounds and by the time I was in 5th grade, it wasn't cool to play on the playground. Middle schools never had them as far as I know. So around 10 seems to have always been the max age for playground equipment.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
partdavid 7y ago
Unfortunately this article is pointless. It's just unsupported assertions. The only part of the article which approaches something worth writing about: > As for the increased dangers, she says Play England has a rigorous assessment system that measures the risk against benefit. I'd be really curious to know how they quantify risk for different designs and how they calculate "benefit" in way that can be measured against it. Unfortunately, the author decided to fill an article with unsupported assertions instead.
- semiotagonal 7y ago
  The pictures though. In the background of the top one, behind the hand of the kid who's standing on the tire, there appears to be a the ribcage of an enormous animal sticking out of the ground.
  - dessant 7y ago
    That's a corrugated steel panel.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
cortesoft 7y ago
I remember reading something somewhere about the real issue with risk and playgrounds... that modern playgrounds often hide risk, whereas older playgrounds it would be more obvious. The idea is that there were clearly places (high up, requiring climbing skill) in the old playgrounds that kids would slowly work their way up to conquering. Because the risk was obvious, kids would approach it with caution and build up skills to get there. In contrast, a lot of injuries occur when 'safe' playgrounds have kids try to do things not designed for, but because of the way they are made don't appear to be dangerous bus actually are. Giving kids the ability to assess risk accurately, and develop the skill to take that risk, is the important part.
- jacobolus 7y ago
  One of the problems with de-risked playgrounds is that kids crave a certain amount of risk, and if there is nothing to do that seems a bit risky, kids (especially older kids) will start looking for ways to make the playground more exciting, doing things that the playground designers didn’t anticipate and didn’t consider the safety of. My understanding (based on some news article I read a couple years ago; take this with a pinch of salt) is that in practice, the injury rates from de-risked playgrounds are not materially lower than injury rates from older riskier playgrounds. The main difference is that the new playgrounds are less fun.
  - siddboots 7y ago
    I agree with the argument, but I'm skeptical of the claim that "injury rates from de-risked playgrounds are not materially lower". If these playgrounds are more expensive to build and deliver no benefit at all, surely they would have been abandoned long ago.
    - mike_hock 7y ago
      lol as if that's how the world works
    - greedo 7y ago
      They make parents and administrators "feel good." That's a significant benefit, one that drives a lot of purchasing decisions.
Waterluvian 7y ago
I let my toddler do absolutely whatever he wanted on local playgrounds and let him have some nasty falls. Unsurprisingly he learned very quickly what his comfort zone is and when he has to be extra careful. My philosophy is that it's not my job to protect him from harm. It's my job to protect him from irreparable harm. The point being that he has to learn how to cope with being hurt and getting hurt is the only way to learn where the line is.
- furyofantares 7y ago
  That sounds great but I think the difficulty is that it can be hard to allow a child to get a little hurt without increased risk that they get a lot hurt. There just isn't a clear line, it's all risk. Sometimes we make errors and increase the risk of harm when trying to decrease it; errors should be corrected but it is otherwise trade-offs and uncertainty.
- BostonEnginerd 7y ago
  We've done the same with our toddler - he's certainly had some good falls, but he quickly figured out how to tackle new obstacles. It's really great watching how excited he gets when he figures out how to climb something new. Once he tried to start climbing the changing table at home, we decided to try to get him to practice climbing on things. He now climbs the table by himself most of the time. This accomplishes two things - he loses interest in climbing it, and if he tries it when our backs are turned he will have the skills to make it up without hurting himself.
- lazyasciiart 7y ago
  I knew a kid who was allowed to play fairly unsupervised as well, but I think her parents found that it didn't seem worth it when she eventually broke her leg in a fall at five. I'm sure you'll feel good about your choice unless one of the nasty falls ends in a head injury or permanent damage of some kind.
  - burlesona 7y ago
    I broke my leg as a kid. It wasn’t a big deal. I remember the cast being kind of cool, the other kids in my school signed it. As a parent I would of course keep my kids away from something I thought would cause a head injury or was seriously dangerous, but minor injury risk (even up to broken bones) is just something all humans live with. Otherwise there’s no sports, no running, no exercise at all.... and that’s even worse for your health.
hevi_jos 7y ago
In my experience the best playgrounds are not playgrounds at all. As a kid my playground was the mountains, the beach, playing with sand,dirt, climbing trees, making cardboard's or bricks' or wood houses. Hearing and telling stories around the campfire... I was terrified when I went back to visit a school I was when I was 4-6 years old. Instead of just one big piece of land for kids to play they had divided it with fences in something like 20 small spaces so they could control kids easier. It was a prison. I believe this has to affect the kids development somehow. I also feel bad for a playground like the one in the image: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de58d4ab6b6fd8/0_0_5374_3575/master/5374.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=685b226959c0ecd95cdd92c8470d0d61 https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de5... Because kids have imagination, they don't need a ship. If they have boxes they have a ship, or a space center or everything they could imagine. This is like a father buying a toy for his children and then only he playing it, not letting his children play. A adult designer takes the best part: imagining, and then doesn't let the kids imagine anything else as you can not move or modify anything in the ship like you can do with boxes or wooden logs. That is making a tremendous disservice to children.
- philyg 7y ago
  In part I agree and disagree with your sentiment. On the other side of the argument, I believe sometimes children too need some inspiration. Perhaps with a set setting they can put more imagination and thought into the scenario that they might want to play
- jeffwass 7y ago
  > I also feel bad for a playground like the one in the image: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de5.. https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de5.... Disagree 100%. My kids absolutely LOVE that playground (assuming it’s the one in Hyde Park, London). It’s nowhere near where we live so we’ve gone there maybe 5-10 times tops. But they love it, and beg to go if we’re nearby. The main problem I have with it is that unlike the picture it can get insanely crowded, sometimes with a queue waiting to go in, managed by park officials. Not sure why you think a fun ship discourages creativity. My kids regularly do creative play and role-playing anywhere, at home or out and about. But it’s also just really cool and tons of fun to climb around on a giant (to them) wooden ship.
annoyingnoob 7y ago
When each of my kids turned 5 I started letting them go around the block with another kid, 2 kids minimum. My neighbors started texting and calling me as if my kid was in danger. They couldn't understand that I let my kid out of my sight. The best playtime is unsupervised. Being allowed to be out of sight and making your own decisions builds confidence. We learn from mistakes, we learn less when we are prevented from making mistakes.
- jkaplowitz 7y ago
  I respect that attitude, but I do wonder if the authorities might decide to take my kid away from me I try that with my kid (after I become a parent). Attitudes are a bit restrictive in many big cities.
  - annoyingnoob 7y ago
    To be fair, I live a suburban area that is relatively safe. We have clean sidewalks and almost no one using them. I started letting them go to the corner, they had to respect not going further and coming back when I asked. Then to the mailboxes around the corner, they would get the mail. Then around the block. It was a progression based on trust and mutual respect.
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    I have no fear that they'll take them away. They won't. It might suck up some time and money in court if they double down on being stupid but they won't get to take them in the end. It's my life being gone through with a fine tooth comb by the state as part of that process that I don't want to risk.
  - ddingus 7y ago
    I grew up that way and simply took my own where they could free range. No way would I tolerate it being otherwise. The value to the child is immense! Just one example: during a crisis time, or disaster, who do you want as peers? I will take the free ranged humans any day. They will have some sense of what "do what it takes" actually means, and few enough boundaries so as to stand a chance of applying it successfully.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jimmytucson 7y ago
Related discussion from a few months ago for those interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19900498 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19900498
swsieber 7y ago
I feel like I live somewhat close to a really risky park: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2018/06/new-pirate-island-playground-officially-open-rigby/ https://www.eastidahonews.com/2018/06/new-pirate-island-play... It is wonderful. sigh I have to wonder just how long it'll last. I did see a section on the concrete rock structure that looks like ther was supposed to bw some sort of rope bridge. I guess that got removed.
- Gorgor 7y ago
  I took a look at your link and I don’t understand why you feel it’s “really risky”. To me (a German), it seems like any other playground with quite common elements. Sure, the climbing web (if that’s what it’s called) is high, but this is a structure where kids will not even get that high if they are not skilled. All the images and videos just looked so American to me. A guy pulling kids in wagons with his motor vehicle, where I’m just asking myself: Why? And of course, almost all the adults and a fair amount of the kids are overweight … I’m not trying to bash America, but this did confirm quite some stereotypes of mine.
SoStoked 7y ago
Kids like a challenge, they are constantly testing their boundaries. It's part of learning risk and what they are capable of. That's very true modern playground hiding risk, in my childhood playground you saw the climbing wall as the biggest challenge you tried it once you were ready and had done a few trials runs on smaller ones.
- jimmaswell 7y ago
  Oddly was never much the case for me. I ended up never experiencing some of the "harder" or more "dangerous" parts of the playground because I just wasn't interested if it seemed too risky. I'd see other kids climbing to a dangerous spot and think they were dumb.
ec109685 7y ago
Growing up, my elementary school had an amazing wooden structure that had been built in years past. After I left, it was torn down and replaced by a prefab thing with much less character and probably less fun. The reason given was liability insurance was more possible with the later generic playground.
- gyuserbti 7y ago
  This has been on my mind a lot lately. It's not just risk changes, it's also variety changes which are also important. Near us there's nice, challenging playgrounds, but their designs have become homogeneous. The older playgrounds had more unique features to each, with custom molded fiberglass. I don't mind some playgrounds drifting to other materials, but the wood ones also have something to offer. I worry they're slowly being replaced by the same sorts of hdpe and brightly painted metal structures that are everywhere else. They're nice but all start to seem the same after awhile. It's sort of like if houses all got torn down after 30 years and were all replaced with variants of the same template, rather than preserving older structures or encouraging innovative architecture. Kids have as much to learn from variety as they do risk.
- underwater 7y ago
  It was probably treated with Chromated Copper Arsenate, which is a carcinogen.
- AJ007 7y ago
  This is the only comment I’ve seen insurance mentioned, which is the main determining factor of what is or isn’t in a playground now. I’m sure the insurance companies have actual data and actuarial tables for what results in lawsuit damages. If a city wants to have those items in a playground, fine, but it isn’t going to be insurable. As a kid I always was much more interested in running around in the woods or climbing trees than playgrounds. Which, insurance still can’t force the removal of as far as I know.
jasonlfunk 7y ago
Problem isn’t so much about risk adverse cities, it’s more about litigious parents. If the city does anything That is considered risky, they open themselves up to big lawsuits if the children do get hurt.
mimimi31 7y ago
I really liked this[1] talk at Google comparing how kids are raised in Germany vs the US. She touches on the topic of playgrounds starting at 11:30, but the whole talk is really worth watching in my opinion. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7-k6nK1VUw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7-k6nK1VUw
blueboo 7y ago
What a bunch of aging-boomer kid's-these-days hyperventilation, bereft of data and full of tut-tutting. Playgrounds in 2019 are full of playful risk. And if you want something more dangerous, there's everywhere else to choose from.
campfireveteran 7y ago
When I was a kid (circa the mid-1980s), there was a real Korean war F-86 Sabre in the middle of a sandpit and a steel labyrinth maze that was shaped like a skyscraper with about 8 levels (tall: 13 ft/4 m, wide: 10 ft/3 m, deep: 3 ft/ 1 m) to crawl through at the De Anza playground in San Jose. Looking at Google Maps, it now contains depressing McDonald's-looking, clown-colored boring stuff no kid is really interested in.
calewis 7y ago
My mother wrote her master thesis on the correlation between risk in early years children and success later in life (a long time ago now) It turns out if you allow children to take (reasonable) risks, then they go on to be more successful in their careers. This is now a relatively well known correlation. I loved doing ‘dangerous’ stuff as a child and this utopian playground makes me sad that most of today’s kids are shielded from it.
- MaxBarraclough 7y ago
  > It turns out if you allow children to take (reasonable) risks, then they go on to be more successful in their careers. How did she control the study well enough to assert that there's a causal relation? Or was it just a correlation?
nkrisc 7y ago
Kids, uh, find a way. I remember when my school replaced the entirely wooden and very interesting play structure from the 70s with one of those new colorful, tubular metal ones. It sure looked safer. The 15 foot spire we took turns leaking off was gone. The tire swing that took out many a passing kid was gone. The piece of 5ft diameter concrete drain sewer pipe I busted my head on was gone. But that didn't stop one kid from nearly scalping himself on the new equipment, requiring 28 Staples. Nor did it prevent broken legs from falls, or many other injuries. But it sure looked safer and I guess we didn't get as many splinters. But kids always find a way to get hurt.
- weavie 7y ago
  My daughter just tried to sit down the other day. Missed the chair and ended up cracking her head on the bookshelf behind. Had to go to hospital to get glued back together.
valley-green 7y ago
Why does guardian call everything a “war”. It’s a fucking playground. Fuck the guardian.
drdeadringer 7y ago
The bay area city I live in is going through the initial process ["community input"] of replacing//updating some playground equipment at the park nearest to where I live. The proposed updated equipment is supposed to be "all inclusive" for kids in terms of age and ability. About a week ago there was an opportunity for neighbors to "choice rank" the top three across each the different types of equipment by example pictures: top three slides, top three climbers, spinners, noise makers, swings. To me the current equipment seems fine but the city is claiming "end of life" and I have no objective reason to doubt. What I did notice is that the current equipment is made of materials such as wood and rope with some plastic. The new equipment will be primarily plastic and metal. I wonder if splinters have become the Great Evil for Junior since I had cause to attend a swing set.

247 points by bo0tzz 7y ago

I am surprised not to see jonathan haidt mentioned- his views on this subject align with the authors, and he brings an interesting perspective to the table.

jammygit 7y ago

I’ve seen some pretty cool playgrounds in the last year where I live, personally

noneeeed 7y ago

One of the unexpectedly adventurous organisations when it comes to playgrounds in the uk is the National Trust. When I was a kid, a visit to an NT property was being dragged around some posh house where you couldn't touch anything. Somewhere around 15-20 years ago I think they realised their clientele was getting older and older and ever since they've been on a bit of a mission to make more of their properties kid/family friendly. They now have some of the best play areas we know of, most of them in woodland, with the equipment etc made of wood, often taken from the woodland, or built into the landscape. We took a small group to one today, and they would have spent hours playing there if we'd had the time, much longer than they will play at some of the more structured "modern" play areas near here.

ascorbic 7y ago
Do you have suggestions of any particularly good ones?
- noneeeed 7y ago
  Near us, Tyntesfield is great. There is an obstacle course type one down by one of the cafes, then there are three on a trail up in the woods. Some are more structured than others. We've taken to using NT sites as breaks on long journeys. At a minimum they will have a cafe, and most will have something to give us and the kids a nice break from the car. Its definitely a nicer way to stretch your legs than a motorway sercvice station. The app is pretty useful for this. They can be pricey as individual visits, but if you go to more than a couple a year, a family membership pays for self pretty quickly.

fredley 7y ago

No mention of the Harbourfront Adventure Playground in Toronto, in the 70's and 80's, a very famous example of an unsafe play environment: https://www.blogto.com/city/2017/09/adventure-playground-toronto-history/ https://www.blogto.com/city/2017/09/adventure-playground-tor...

kingbirdy 7y ago
I would've loved to have a place like that as a kid
ninth_ant 7y ago
There is an adventure playground in Berkeley that my kids adored when I used to live in a nearby city. I’m not sure how it’s avoided a similar fate to the Toronto example you refer to, but it’s a wonderful place. Terrifying to watch as a parent no doubt, but empowering for the kids.

darth_skywalker 7y ago

Sure, some playgrounds may be mind-numbingly dull, but those are a well-intentioned response to older playgrounds that posed serious physical dangers. You can argue that getting a little bit scraped up once in a while isn't bad for children; it may teach them lessons about how to avoid such future mistakes - but plenty of children have sustained more serious injuries on playgrounds that allowed them to climb much higher than they could on, say, a tree in nature (speaking from my life experience). I think the article conflates the issue of modern over parenting with safer playground design - which if done right, can only be a good thing.

hashkb 7y ago
I've fallen from trees higher than any playground. Only serious injury I ever had was on (and because of) AstroTurf.
- catalogia 7y ago
  Ditto, I grew up in the woods so climbing on trees was an everyday activity for me, more frequent than playing on playgrounds. I used to climb trees as far as the tree would support, then climb it further until it collapsed. I fell out of more trees doing that than I can count. Thankfully, helicopter parents cannot hope to regulate trees.
- watwut 7y ago
  Ok and I know ine guy (kid) who spent weeks in hospital due to fall from tree and two other people who broke limb (adults). That is on top of head incidents close to me. I don't prevent my kids to climb trees, but accidents do happen.
ip26 7y ago
A big part of the complaint is that injury rates & severity has stayed about the same. It seems the safer we make the playground, the more risks the kids take. It's called risk compensation.
- lazyasciiart 7y ago

diego 7y ago

Calling this a war is the reason the saying "pick your battles" exists. Anyone who is a parent knows that kids always find ways to hurt themselves, there is no shortage of opportunities. Might as well make playgrounds safe, kids don't care as long as they have fun.

Iv 7y ago

All these old pictures showing kids having fun in environments we consider harmful, always depict kids older than those we typically let play in playgrounds. From the age of ~3 kids start to learn their motor skills to climb, grab, jump, do all sort of stuff. Kids of the age of these pictures, you let them play wherever that's not a death trap, they'll basically be fine.

jessaustin 7y ago
Stay out of the abandoned mineshaft, kids!

imgabe 7y ago

They do have softer ground and rounder corners but the playgrounds today are way cooler than I was a kid. The one near me has climbing walls and a zip line. It's crazy.

CapitalistCartr 7y ago

I find the playgrounds in my city (Tampa, FL) to be excellent. This article is completely wrong about the parks here. I have 5 young grandchildren and a 20 month old son, so lots of observation time. The grounds are wildly loved by the kids there. They have rubber surfaces that dramatically reduce broken bones, but do not prevent pain. I love that they still get scrapes, bruises. The sets are large, complex, and fun. My kids will spend as many hours as we let them.

jacobolus 7y ago
How old are the kids you are talking about? 20-month-olds are happy with literally any playground, especially if there are a few other kids. They are still learning the very basics of climbing, running, sliding, swinging, ... Most playgrounds are okay for 0–8 year-olds. It’s older kids, especially teenagers, who get most bored on de-risked modern playgrounds, and either give up on them or start looking around for (often quite stupid) ways to make them riskier, e.g. a group of 6 kids climbing onto a swing intended for 1 kid (thereby breaking it), riding their skateboards down the slide (and almost running over the toddlers at the bottom), climbing up onto the roofs of buildings that weren’t intended for climbing, throwing rocks at each-other, ... The playground near my house was re-done a few years ago, and the number of kids older than 10 has dropped dramatically. All of the toddlers are plenty happy with the new one, but it’s a net loss for the city because there are many good playgrounds for kids under 8, and very few for older kids. Aside: those rubber surfaces are very uncomfortable on bare feet any time the temperature is above 80°F. And often playground wood chips are full of extremely sharp corners (My adult friend stepped on a wood chip which punctured both his shoe and his foot). Sand, dirt, grass, and even concrete are all much more pleasant.
- learc83 7y ago
  I was a kid when we still had dangerous steel playgrounds and by the time I was in 5th grade, it wasn't cool to play on the playground. Middle schools never had them as far as I know. So around 10 seems to have always been the max age for playground equipment.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

partdavid 7y ago

Unfortunately this article is pointless. It's just unsupported assertions. The only part of the article which approaches something worth writing about: > As for the increased dangers, she says Play England has a rigorous assessment system that measures the risk against benefit. I'd be really curious to know how they quantify risk for different designs and how they calculate "benefit" in way that can be measured against it. Unfortunately, the author decided to fill an article with unsupported assertions instead.

semiotagonal 7y ago
The pictures though. In the background of the top one, behind the hand of the kid who's standing on the tire, there appears to be a the ribcage of an enormous animal sticking out of the ground.
- dessant 7y ago
  That's a corrugated steel panel.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

cortesoft 7y ago

I remember reading something somewhere about the real issue with risk and playgrounds... that modern playgrounds often hide risk, whereas older playgrounds it would be more obvious. The idea is that there were clearly places (high up, requiring climbing skill) in the old playgrounds that kids would slowly work their way up to conquering. Because the risk was obvious, kids would approach it with caution and build up skills to get there. In contrast, a lot of injuries occur when 'safe' playgrounds have kids try to do things not designed for, but because of the way they are made don't appear to be dangerous bus actually are. Giving kids the ability to assess risk accurately, and develop the skill to take that risk, is the important part.

jacobolus 7y ago
One of the problems with de-risked playgrounds is that kids crave a certain amount of risk, and if there is nothing to do that seems a bit risky, kids (especially older kids) will start looking for ways to make the playground more exciting, doing things that the playground designers didn’t anticipate and didn’t consider the safety of. My understanding (based on some news article I read a couple years ago; take this with a pinch of salt) is that in practice, the injury rates from de-risked playgrounds are not materially lower than injury rates from older riskier playgrounds. The main difference is that the new playgrounds are less fun.
- siddboots 7y ago
  I agree with the argument, but I'm skeptical of the claim that "injury rates from de-risked playgrounds are not materially lower". If these playgrounds are more expensive to build and deliver no benefit at all, surely they would have been abandoned long ago.
  - mike_hock 7y ago
    lol as if that's how the world works
  - greedo 7y ago
    They make parents and administrators "feel good." That's a significant benefit, one that drives a lot of purchasing decisions.

Waterluvian 7y ago

I let my toddler do absolutely whatever he wanted on local playgrounds and let him have some nasty falls. Unsurprisingly he learned very quickly what his comfort zone is and when he has to be extra careful. My philosophy is that it's not my job to protect him from harm. It's my job to protect him from irreparable harm. The point being that he has to learn how to cope with being hurt and getting hurt is the only way to learn where the line is.

furyofantares 7y ago
That sounds great but I think the difficulty is that it can be hard to allow a child to get a little hurt without increased risk that they get a lot hurt. There just isn't a clear line, it's all risk. Sometimes we make errors and increase the risk of harm when trying to decrease it; errors should be corrected but it is otherwise trade-offs and uncertainty.
BostonEnginerd 7y ago
We've done the same with our toddler - he's certainly had some good falls, but he quickly figured out how to tackle new obstacles. It's really great watching how excited he gets when he figures out how to climb something new. Once he tried to start climbing the changing table at home, we decided to try to get him to practice climbing on things. He now climbs the table by himself most of the time. This accomplishes two things - he loses interest in climbing it, and if he tries it when our backs are turned he will have the skills to make it up without hurting himself.
lazyasciiart 7y ago
I knew a kid who was allowed to play fairly unsupervised as well, but I think her parents found that it didn't seem worth it when she eventually broke her leg in a fall at five. I'm sure you'll feel good about your choice unless one of the nasty falls ends in a head injury or permanent damage of some kind.
- burlesona 7y ago
  I broke my leg as a kid. It wasn’t a big deal. I remember the cast being kind of cool, the other kids in my school signed it. As a parent I would of course keep my kids away from something I thought would cause a head injury or was seriously dangerous, but minor injury risk (even up to broken bones) is just something all humans live with. Otherwise there’s no sports, no running, no exercise at all.... and that’s even worse for your health.

hevi_jos 7y ago

In my experience the best playgrounds are not playgrounds at all. As a kid my playground was the mountains, the beach, playing with sand,dirt, climbing trees, making cardboard's or bricks' or wood houses. Hearing and telling stories around the campfire... I was terrified when I went back to visit a school I was when I was 4-6 years old. Instead of just one big piece of land for kids to play they had divided it with fences in something like 20 small spaces so they could control kids easier. It was a prison. I believe this has to affect the kids development somehow. I also feel bad for a playground like the one in the image: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de58d4ab6b6fd8/0_0_5374_3575/master/5374.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=685b226959c0ecd95cdd92c8470d0d61 https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de5... Because kids have imagination, they don't need a ship. If they have boxes they have a ship, or a space center or everything they could imagine. This is like a father buying a toy for his children and then only he playing it, not letting his children play. A adult designer takes the best part: imagining, and then doesn't let the kids imagine anything else as you can not move or modify anything in the ship like you can do with boxes or wooden logs. That is making a tremendous disservice to children.

philyg 7y ago
In part I agree and disagree with your sentiment. On the other side of the argument, I believe sometimes children too need some inspiration. Perhaps with a set setting they can put more imagination and thought into the scenario that they might want to play
jeffwass 7y ago
> I also feel bad for a playground like the one in the image: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de5.. https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/1094dd57d6a80c1ae1fb131937de5.... Disagree 100%. My kids absolutely LOVE that playground (assuming it’s the one in Hyde Park, London). It’s nowhere near where we live so we’ve gone there maybe 5-10 times tops. But they love it, and beg to go if we’re nearby. The main problem I have with it is that unlike the picture it can get insanely crowded, sometimes with a queue waiting to go in, managed by park officials. Not sure why you think a fun ship discourages creativity. My kids regularly do creative play and role-playing anywhere, at home or out and about. But it’s also just really cool and tons of fun to climb around on a giant (to them) wooden ship.

annoyingnoob 7y ago

When each of my kids turned 5 I started letting them go around the block with another kid, 2 kids minimum. My neighbors started texting and calling me as if my kid was in danger. They couldn't understand that I let my kid out of my sight. The best playtime is unsupervised. Being allowed to be out of sight and making your own decisions builds confidence. We learn from mistakes, we learn less when we are prevented from making mistakes.

jkaplowitz 7y ago
I respect that attitude, but I do wonder if the authorities might decide to take my kid away from me I try that with my kid (after I become a parent). Attitudes are a bit restrictive in many big cities.
- annoyingnoob 7y ago
  To be fair, I live a suburban area that is relatively safe. We have clean sidewalks and almost no one using them. I started letting them go to the corner, they had to respect not going further and coming back when I asked. Then to the mailboxes around the corner, they would get the mail. Then around the block. It was a progression based on trust and mutual respect.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  I have no fear that they'll take them away. They won't. It might suck up some time and money in court if they double down on being stupid but they won't get to take them in the end. It's my life being gone through with a fine tooth comb by the state as part of that process that I don't want to risk.
- ddingus 7y ago
  I grew up that way and simply took my own where they could free range. No way would I tolerate it being otherwise. The value to the child is immense! Just one example: during a crisis time, or disaster, who do you want as peers? I will take the free ranged humans any day. They will have some sense of what "do what it takes" actually means, and few enough boundaries so as to stand a chance of applying it successfully.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jimmytucson 7y ago

Related discussion from a few months ago for those interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19900498 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19900498

swsieber 7y ago

I feel like I live somewhat close to a really risky park: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2018/06/new-pirate-island-playground-officially-open-rigby/ https://www.eastidahonews.com/2018/06/new-pirate-island-play... It is wonderful. sigh I have to wonder just how long it'll last. I did see a section on the concrete rock structure that looks like ther was supposed to bw some sort of rope bridge. I guess that got removed.

Gorgor 7y ago
I took a look at your link and I don’t understand why you feel it’s “really risky”. To me (a German), it seems like any other playground with quite common elements. Sure, the climbing web (if that’s what it’s called) is high, but this is a structure where kids will not even get that high if they are not skilled. All the images and videos just looked so American to me. A guy pulling kids in wagons with his motor vehicle, where I’m just asking myself: Why? And of course, almost all the adults and a fair amount of the kids are overweight … I’m not trying to bash America, but this did confirm quite some stereotypes of mine.

SoStoked 7y ago

Kids like a challenge, they are constantly testing their boundaries. It's part of learning risk and what they are capable of. That's very true modern playground hiding risk, in my childhood playground you saw the climbing wall as the biggest challenge you tried it once you were ready and had done a few trials runs on smaller ones.

jimmaswell 7y ago
Oddly was never much the case for me. I ended up never experiencing some of the "harder" or more "dangerous" parts of the playground because I just wasn't interested if it seemed too risky. I'd see other kids climbing to a dangerous spot and think they were dumb.

ec109685 7y ago

Growing up, my elementary school had an amazing wooden structure that had been built in years past. After I left, it was torn down and replaced by a prefab thing with much less character and probably less fun. The reason given was liability insurance was more possible with the later generic playground.

gyuserbti 7y ago
This has been on my mind a lot lately. It's not just risk changes, it's also variety changes which are also important. Near us there's nice, challenging playgrounds, but their designs have become homogeneous. The older playgrounds had more unique features to each, with custom molded fiberglass. I don't mind some playgrounds drifting to other materials, but the wood ones also have something to offer. I worry they're slowly being replaced by the same sorts of hdpe and brightly painted metal structures that are everywhere else. They're nice but all start to seem the same after awhile. It's sort of like if houses all got torn down after 30 years and were all replaced with variants of the same template, rather than preserving older structures or encouraging innovative architecture. Kids have as much to learn from variety as they do risk.
underwater 7y ago
It was probably treated with Chromated Copper Arsenate, which is a carcinogen.
AJ007 7y ago
This is the only comment I’ve seen insurance mentioned, which is the main determining factor of what is or isn’t in a playground now. I’m sure the insurance companies have actual data and actuarial tables for what results in lawsuit damages. If a city wants to have those items in a playground, fine, but it isn’t going to be insurable. As a kid I always was much more interested in running around in the woods or climbing trees than playgrounds. Which, insurance still can’t force the removal of as far as I know.

jasonlfunk 7y ago

Problem isn’t so much about risk adverse cities, it’s more about litigious parents. If the city does anything That is considered risky, they open themselves up to big lawsuits if the children do get hurt.

mimimi31 7y ago

I really liked this[1] talk at Google comparing how kids are raised in Germany vs the US. She touches on the topic of playgrounds starting at 11:30, but the whole talk is really worth watching in my opinion. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7-k6nK1VUw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7-k6nK1VUw

blueboo 7y ago

What a bunch of aging-boomer kid's-these-days hyperventilation, bereft of data and full of tut-tutting. Playgrounds in 2019 are full of playful risk. And if you want something more dangerous, there's everywhere else to choose from.

campfireveteran 7y ago

When I was a kid (circa the mid-1980s), there was a real Korean war F-86 Sabre in the middle of a sandpit and a steel labyrinth maze that was shaped like a skyscraper with about 8 levels (tall: 13 ft/4 m, wide: 10 ft/3 m, deep: 3 ft/ 1 m) to crawl through at the De Anza playground in San Jose. Looking at Google Maps, it now contains depressing McDonald's-looking, clown-colored boring stuff no kid is really interested in.

calewis 7y ago

My mother wrote her master thesis on the correlation between risk in early years children and success later in life (a long time ago now) It turns out if you allow children to take (reasonable) risks, then they go on to be more successful in their careers. This is now a relatively well known correlation. I loved doing ‘dangerous’ stuff as a child and this utopian playground makes me sad that most of today’s kids are shielded from it.

MaxBarraclough 7y ago
> It turns out if you allow children to take (reasonable) risks, then they go on to be more successful in their careers. How did she control the study well enough to assert that there's a causal relation? Or was it just a correlation?

nkrisc 7y ago

Kids, uh, find a way. I remember when my school replaced the entirely wooden and very interesting play structure from the 70s with one of those new colorful, tubular metal ones. It sure looked safer. The 15 foot spire we took turns leaking off was gone. The tire swing that took out many a passing kid was gone. The piece of 5ft diameter concrete drain sewer pipe I busted my head on was gone. But that didn't stop one kid from nearly scalping himself on the new equipment, requiring 28 Staples. Nor did it prevent broken legs from falls, or many other injuries. But it sure looked safer and I guess we didn't get as many splinters. But kids always find a way to get hurt.

weavie 7y ago
My daughter just tried to sit down the other day. Missed the chair and ended up cracking her head on the bookshelf behind. Had to go to hospital to get glued back together.

valley-green 7y ago

Why does guardian call everything a “war”. It’s a fucking playground. Fuck the guardian.

drdeadringer 7y ago

The bay area city I live in is going through the initial process ["community input"] of replacing//updating some playground equipment at the park nearest to where I live. The proposed updated equipment is supposed to be "all inclusive" for kids in terms of age and ability. About a week ago there was an opportunity for neighbors to "choice rank" the top three across each the different types of equipment by example pictures: top three slides, top three climbers, spinners, noise makers, swings. To me the current equipment seems fine but the city is claiming "end of life" and I have no objective reason to doubt. What I did notice is that the current equipment is made of materials such as wood and rope with some plastic. The new equipment will be primarily plastic and metal. I wonder if splinters have become the Great Evil for Junior since I had cause to attend a swing set.